Prepared: April 17, 1979.
Transcription, Editing and Markup: Paul Saba
Copyright: This work is in the Public Domain under the Creative Commons Common Deed. You can freely copy, distribute and display this work; as well as make derivative and commercial works. Please credit the Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line as your source, include the url to this work, and note any of the transcribers, editors & proofreaders above.
April 17, 1979
Political Commission
Philadelphia Workers Organizing Committee
Dear Comrades:
We acknowledge receipt of your letter of March 20 in response to our earlier communication concerning what we view as a sectarian analysis of and response to the recent split within the Guardian.
Our letter was written in an effort to develop a comradely discussion concerning the history of the internal Guardian struggle which might lead you to reassess the views you have so far advanced.
However, your response and several subsequent events do not encourage us to believe that you are prepared to deal with the questions involved in a thoroughly political fashion. You continue to insist that a decision not to affiliate with the OCIC is inherently sectarian. Clay Newlin’s recent speech in the Bay Area (a tape of which we have heard) makes an all-out attack on the National Network of Marxist-Leninist Clubs for not joining the OCIC even before he has been able to ascertain the reasons for this decision.
To say that endorsement of the Guardian’s “general critique” of the OCIC is sectarian when the heart of that critique is bound up with our differences over party-building line is an attempt to trivialize real political differences and to suggest that all such differences are mere pretexts for what you call the “circle spirit.”
Comrades, we are very sorry that you have decided on such a course. It is an incorrect political judgment about the significance of the split in the Guardian and it is, objectively, an attempt to exploit the exposure of Smith’s sectarianism for narrow organizational purposes. But we will not conciliate your effort. You cannot define the parameters of the Marxist-Leninist movement simply on the basis of those who join the OCIC and those who do not. We have many criticisms of your party-building line and the political steps you have taken in recent years to implement it – including the general plan for the establishment of the OCIC. But we will criticize that line on its merits – not on whether it promotes “unity” or could lead to “splits.” We believe that the “unity” vs. “split” argument is demagogic since the only groups we have ever advocated splitting from are the CPUSA, the left-opportunist groupings and the Jack Smith opportunist circle at the Guardian.
At this point, we do not see the value of a meeting between the two of us and your political commission.
Rather, what seems appropriate is a more formal liaison meeting between the leadership of the Club Network and your body. Such a meeting should be aimed at a frank exchange of views on the current state of the party-building movement and for developing systematic relations between our organizations. In the course of that discussion, it may be appropriate to take up some of the specific questions raised in our exchange of letters.
We propose that this meeting be held sometime in Mid-May and that sufficient time be devoted to the discussion so that all points can be covered thoroughly. If you agree with this general proposal, we will recommend a more detailed agenda reflecting our concerns and trust that you will do the same. Melinda Paras, the Club Network’s national coordinator, will be permanently located in New York starting around May 10 and will, of course, participate along with the two of us.
We will be happy to make suitable arrangements for this meeting to be held in New York. But we are also willing to meet with you in Philadelphia if you find this more convenient.
We are looking forward to hearing from you soon.
Sincerely,
Irwin Sllber
Frances M. Beal
P.S. We did not make any extensive circulation of our original letter to you and, unfortunately, did not keep a record of it. To the best of our recollection, copies were sent to DEMLO, El Comite, Melinda Paras (who has shared its contents with Bruce Occena and Max Elbaum) and Toni Vlasits who was told that copies could be circulated to OCIC members.